The Review of Human Freedom in Moral Philosophy - Essay Example

Introduction

There is existence in today's world several social phenomena, one of the most significant to society's well-being being 'ethics' or 'morality' (mores) since the human race is a social organism. Therefore, the phrase "mores" can be used in the explanation, a robust set of guidelines, and a particular society's culture to ensure its progress. Diverse philosophical theories on moral rules are found in numerous communities worldwide; most moral values with their distinct characteristics have developed history and are defined by different moral philosophies. Experts and scholars in the field of philosophy (such as Plato) throughout time have tried to understand morality’s fundamental role in society by establishing and applying various philosophical theories. Additionally, these ideologies have highlighted the concept that a specific person enjoys the independence of morality. This essay's key objective is to study philosophical ideologies about ethics that have existed for thousands of years and review how the evolution of moral philosophy has influenced human freedom, and thus a person is morally responsible for their actions.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Existence of Free Will

Historically the main problem with an individual’s freedom of moral responsibility is that most people believe that human beings have free will and are thus morally responsible for their actions. Others believe that humans do not possess free will and all their decisions are pre-determined. Thus even if a person seems to act freely their decision (such as buying some oranges), might be determined by several factors such as being mentally or physically or emotionally coerced. The argument is they would not have acted genuinely free if they would have an otherwise action. With the example of buying some oranges, a person is truly free to buy some apples, and nobody forces them to buy the oranges, the next section talks of factors influenced by a person's desires.

Assumptions on Free Will

However, some philosophers have argued that an individual's decision is influenced by one's desires, determined by various factors, namely; personality characteristics, past experiences, tastes, and circumstances. Therefore, according to these factors and a person’s upbringing, their prior decision to purchase oranges rather than apples is no less a pre-determination. The simple answer to the notion of 'free will' is that there is extensive evidence by numerous philosophers (such as Kant, Reid, Kane, and Inwagen) to display its existence. Most people believe in a person’s responsibility for their actions (whether morally right or wrong), those deniers assume that no one should be held responsible for their immoral actions. They argue that individuals' free will is only determined by their personality characteristics and past experiences, thus denying the presence of moral responsibility, plus equating moral responsibility with moral freedom.

Moral Freedom and Moral Responsibility

The existence of moral freedom ensures the presence of moral responsibility. The human race has various significance in learning about moral theories. They help a person with basic morality features like distinguishing between right action and wrong action. Two, they can help an individual understand other people's moral obligations, thus obtaining valuable information on moral rules. Further, it enables human beings to review and have dialogues on challenging moral situations that have plagued the world for years.

Additionally, it ensures individual moral progress and the comprehension of that person's ability to reason and act in a morally righteous way. The existence of free will in humans guarantees each person to act freely and differently according to every individual ability to perform daily activities. Some philosophers have theorized that such independence ethically speaking will limit many from freedom. However, these moral values are in place to ensure the progress of ethical values guaranteeing each person’s responsibility for their day-to-day activities, additionally following this is the study of maximizing happiness.

Utilitarianism

Numerous rules of conduct have been utilized by theorists who seek to teach people about the advantages of morality. These different ideologies have been explored and reflect ethical challenges and benefits that explain the whole agenda's moral values. Two significant theories explore moral independence, namely, John Mills' "Utilitarianism" philosophy, which identifies that every individual in the entire world has a responsibility to maximize their happiness, and thus everyone has a function to always act in social well-being. One argument found in Mills’ Utilitarianism theory is that it focuses on one aspect of moral values, therefore restricting moral freedom by giving people a choice on what ethical rule to follow.

According to utilitarianism, people are given the option to reason, thus ensuring each person's best interests. This theory's general objections are mainly subjective because a person's motivation to achieve happiness for themselves and society is a triumph and not a challenge. Another benefit of this theory is that utilitarianism seeks to create a secular world that will eventually focus on humanity alone. the existence of numerous religions in the world restricts the human race to thinking of themselves thus limiting their freedom to focus on a supernatural god, additionally, the next subject is learning Immanuel Kant’s theory

Moral Freedom Perspective

The other philosophical principle that attempts to explain ethical independence are "Moral Freedom" philosophy by Immanuel Kant. He describes moral values as an essential factor in a human being where these values are used as tools to attain set objectives ultimately. Kant's theory's primary aim is to enlighten on the reasons and importance of the 'Categorical Imperative' (CI) ideology. The ideology is popularly described as the "ultimate standard of morality” since the ethical rules are to be followed in every event. Kant further states that any action is morally wrong; it does not follow the set guidelines of the Categorical Imperative. Kant theorizes that an individual’s level of morality is measured by their day-to-day actions and not by the results of their actions. Hence, Kant's philosophy states that actions define the dependency of a person's morality on their moral values; additionally, the following part describes Kant's philosophy's features.

The Features of Kant’s Theory

further emphasizes that a person's results do not sway morality; therefore, the 'Moral Freedom' philosophy entails that all moral rules must be followed to be morally righteous. Kant's philosophy, emphasizes the guidelines to be applied but fully supports moral freedom for an individual to attain true moral independence; one has to follow moral values regardless of the deed's consequences. This philosophy is likened to Mills' Utilitarianism with the realization of Kant's compulsory guideline. For a person to be morally right, they need to be goodwill at every action, thus mirroring Mills' theory on society's wellbeing. In Kant's theory, any action achieved from selfish means by a person does not have good morals. Moreover, the following part is about Kant’s justification for his theory.

Kant's Justification for Moral Freedom

According to Kant, free will is due to morality; thus, moral freedom is brought into existence. A will that is controlled by ethical rules with this ability can act according to this specific moral law. Kant’s argument claims that if acting bluntly is acting ethically, then the presence of a moral will be justified by a human's capacity for independence and displaying that every person possesses it. To enable the demonstration’s viability, Kant had to introduce factors that control these wills with practical aspects and that moral judgments are successful. One must note that Kant emphasizes the importance of the actions rather than the outcomes of those actions.

The Fundamentals of Goodwill

Kant's philosophy's main objection is that its general feature involves the idea of a person being embroiled in an action of goodwill regardless of the results. People do not consider that this freedom to perform this goodwill is fundamental for the growth of unity in the human race, and if all people acted like this, the world would be a better place to call home. There is also freedom granted to people who perform goodwill since the decision to act for others' well-being belongs to them, and all they have to do is act morally. Kant's study on the Categorical Imperative ensures everyone's ethical responsibility is derived from a person's free will; thus, this exploration involves rationality and autonomy. Another objection discovered in the philosophy is that it assumes that every person is a rational adult who follows and respects moral rules. Additionally, the next section talks about the respect people show each other in Kant’s theory.

The Respect of Others

However, Kant's study clearly states that moral enslavement is derived from the over-comprehension of this theory, attempting to argue with its features like its autonomy and measure of rationality. Further enslavement might be obtained from the fighting of goodwill actions and rationally rejecting righteous actions. Kant’s theory has benefits that focus on a person being recognized by another because the philosophy is dependent on how people treat others. Therefore, the respect displayed by the different people in this theory ensures the proper monitoring of moral actions impartially and consistently. A fellow human's dignity is upheld as the theory implies that each human being has an absolute value. The next section talks about the importance of following moral rules.

Freedom According to Kant and Mills

Kant’s philosophy offers a notion of justice fairness and freedom by establishing a system that respects all humans’ worth by ensuring equal rights owned by each individual. There are differences in Mills' utilitarianism, and Kant's morality of freedom Mills’ theory states that a person is morally upright when they perform a good deed while in Kant's theory, it entails the importance of the action rather than the result. Therefore, in both philosophies, it is clear that moral freedom is attained once the moral values have been followed to reach satisfaction, which is morality. Most humans find moral values to have important since they are guidelines to be followed by everybody, the early moral philosophers talk about freedom like how virtuous actions, when applied, help moral freedom like the evolution of deontological into consequential principles.

The Evolution of Consequential Theories

The development of deontological theories into consequential theories where the former have an outcome that transmits the wellbeing of others with happiness pleasure and useful, they offer the freedom of people to individuals who have the free will to perform goodwill as necessary and they follow the rule that one is free to do what they consider moral. However, consequential theories focus on the real justification for people’s actions by allowing them to attain reasonable moral obligation. Further, these consequential theories allow moral freedom as it enables individuals to reason and figure out their actions without restricting independence for making decisions. The assumption that every person alive enjoys their freedom and goodwill in their action is justifiable since each individual is looking for a happy conclusion even though the conclusions may vary. There is a slight improvement from deontological into consequential principles because of shortcomings, such as assuming every person is a rational adult is changed into allowing people to attain exem...